So WHY do we need MORE restrictions,...when it's incredibly obvious that the Obama administration won't even use the many existing laws already on the
books to prosecute felons and fugitives illegally attempting to purchase firearms?

Could it be that there is an Obama hidden agenda at work here?

Seriously, if Obama is truly concerned with making america's streets safer, shouldn't he be focused on putting away convicted felons and fugitives for
the ILLEGAL purchase of guns...using our existing laws...INSTEAD of trying to construct NEW laws aimed at restricting and destroying the second
amendment rights of law-abiding citizens?

"I think the approach of the Federal Government should be simple: We should focus on deterring and punishing violent criminals. It's violent criminals
that commit these crimes, that's where our target should be. At the same time, we should be safeguarding the constitutional rights of lawful, peaceful
citizens."

If Obama really cared for children, he would find a way to stop inner city gang violence, considering that's what most of the crime is about. Pretty
funny he claims his love for Chicago, but it's still riddled with inner city violence.

If Obama really cared for children, he would find a way to stop inner city gang violence, considering that's what most of the crime is about. Pretty
funny he claims his love for Chicago, but it's still riddled with inner city violence.

edit on 4/11/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)

That or he would make sure Drone strikes where only used when the targets where absolutely sure they would be correct.

Obama could give two squirts for the children, its all political currency to pass gun control, its not about the guns its about control.

A law enforcement website with more than 1.5 million unique visitors per month and 400,000 registered members, PoliceOne asked more than 15,000
verified active and retired law enforcement personnel more than 20 questions about how they believe stricter gun control will impact the community.

The participants were spread out across the country, and about 80 percent were current law enforcement, 20 percent former/retired.

Here are some of the results of the survey, which was conducted between March 4 and March 13:

Nearly 96 percent said that a ban on standard capacity magazines with more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

More than 81 percent said that “gun buy-backs” do not reduce gun violence.

Nearly 80 percent said that a ban on private transfers of firearms between law-abiding citizens would not reduce violent crime.
71 percent said that a ban on “assault weapons” would have no impact on reducing violent crime.

20.5 percent said it would actually have a ​negative ​impact.

More than 70 percent opposed the idea of a national database of legal gun sales.

Just wanted to get that out in the open before the usual suspects insert it into this thread....

His administration has been historically week on this issue and out of 90 federal districts, Chicago ranked dead last in the enforcement of these
laws. Wonder why?

Cities like Chicago are the reason for the 1934 machine gun "ban" because of the Dillenger's the average gun owner wasn't the one going around
commiting "Valentines Day massacres" or the rest of the country.

Chicago is deeply tied to the gun control agenda in more ways than one " never letting a good crisis' go to waste they pass EO's and laws because
they can never be seen as irrelevant.

They won't enforce gun laws because if they did there would be no need for more regulation, and they will not be seen as being "irrelevant".

The gun control crowd has a long history of absolutely being ineffective, but people have been so dumbed down they are so oblivious to the truth.

What if the Obama administration needs the streets filled with these criminals in order to push constitution crushing 'laws'? Perhaps by having the
non-hazarous people incarcerated and streets riddled with criminals will provide the perquisites for violent retaliation, Civil War II; martial law

Lets give credit where credits due: the local judicial system is the ones prosecuting the felons with firearms, not the fed govt, Fox News and the
senator didn't point that out. I see more stories in my local news paper about felons getting caught and the state level charging them, so it's not
like they're not being prosecuted, it's just done at a different level

Just because you fail a background check doesn't mean you have reason to be prosecuted....what is wrong with you people. If someone is an EX-con,
they fail the background check, but it's not a crime to apply. If someone is a foreigner and not a legal citizen, they fail the check, but they
haven't done anything wrong.

Jeez, next you will be wanting everyone that fails their drivers test to e prosecuted.

Why are you afraid of universal background checks? If you are legally able to own a gun, you will pass it.

Originally posted by sensfan
Just because you fail a background check doesn't mean you have reason to be prosecuted....what is wrong with you people. If someone is an EX-con,
they fail the background check, but it's not a crime to apply. If someone is a foreigner and not a legal citizen, they fail the check, but they
haven't done anything wrong.

Jeez, next you will be wanting everyone that fails their drivers test to e prosecuted.

Why are you afraid of universal background checks? If you are legally able to own a gun, you will pass it.

What a country you have there. Sheesh.

That is not what Cruz is saying. Watch the Video Clip. It is illegal for felons and fugitives to own guns, possess guns and to buy guns. These
felons referenced purchased guns illegally. They did not walk into a local licensed gun shop to procure them. If they did, then the gun shop as
committed a Federal Crime as well. The felons know that they cannot possess a firearm. If they don't, then they are dumber than I thought.

This is the realm of the Federal DOJ districts to prosecute these cases.

does Holder really mean what he says?? Actions speak louder than words.

Effectively combating violent crime also demands that – with the help and leadership of our U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, as well as the FBI, ATF,
DEA, and Marshals Service – we continue to crack down on the gang-, gun-, and drug-fueled violence that menaces our streets and threatens our
communities. Through intelligence-driven, threat-based prosecutions – we will focus on dismantling criminal organizations and putting them out of
business for good. In so doing, we will fight to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who are not lawfully allowed to possess them." -
Attorney General Eric Holder, April 25, 2011

Just wanted to get that out in the open before the usual suspects insert it into this thread....

His administration has been historically week on this issue and out of 90 federal districts, Chicago ranked dead last in the enforcement of these
laws. Wonder why?

That's been my bone to pick for a while. Because of Chicago, the rest of us in IL have had to put up with draconian gun laws. But, even when they do
catch someone who is in illegal possession, it's "Oh, you have a gun, Well, shame on you. slap on the wrist Next case". Then, they want to
scream, holler and whine about gun violence. More laws won't do a damn bit of good, because they don't enforce what is already on the books. Obama
just wants to be able to say they did something, but those evil Republicans kept us from passing laws that will "keep our children safe". All
the while planning to use this to smear Repubs in the next election.

Originally posted by HomerinNC
Lets give credit where credits due: the local judicial system is the ones prosecuting the felons with firearms, not the fed govt, Fox News and the
senator didn't point that out. I see more stories in my local news paper about felons getting caught and the state level charging them, so it's not
like they're not being prosecuted, it's just done at a different level

This is the jurisdiction of the State or in may casesf the DOJ and the US Attorneys office in any one of the 90 plus districts. It is a violation of
Federal law unless specific gun ownership rights have been restored to the individual by the convicting state.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(1). The offense is a felony. The law provides the following:

It shall be unlawful for any person-

(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

***

to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or
ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce

Hey! if the Obama administration started to prosecute all the fellons that are looking to get guns what would he do for a base?.....Ya I know
that fellons are not supposed to be able to vote,wink, wink

If 15000 tryed to get guns and I assume they did not or it would be all over the MSM news then it would lead a"thinking" person to believe that the
gun laws in place are working.

By the way , can anyone direct me to where the Chicago DA has arrested and is prosecuting anyone for all the shootings that have accrued in
Chicago???? I mean maybe its just become the "NORM" like all the other things this administration can't or won't do anything about.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.